Bet on Churchill Downs
 

As of now, will we be able to bet on Twin Spires on Churchill this weekend?

Help! Don't want to cap if I can't bet and watch.

Thank you,

Spyder

Almost certainly no. CDI filed suit yesterday against the THG and FHPBA and this scenario will get worse before it gets better.

Listen to Matt Hegarty on ATR (Thurs., 4:15-4:40) and read his coverage in the DRF.

Thanks Steve,

What a mess and what a shame.

Spyder

Well, yes and no.

Appears that the horsemen are prepared to make a stand in this set of negotiations. It may be that this circumstance, (as with several other area of industry action recently like RMTC, etc.), is ripe for meaningful and long-term resolution.

We'll see, but the whole formation of the THG, in response to the formation of TrackNet, was progressive in a way as it brought 5 states' worth (PA, OH, KY, FL, TX) of horsemen together in a single voice. Should provide for more direct communication and clearer answers among all parties involved...

It isn't a shame, it is great. Finally there will be a storm where people are going to get hurt(financially) and maybe they will realize what they are doing to the customer.

I bet thru TwinSpires, but, luckily, have an OTB less than 5 miles away

When they are down 10% on a day that probably gives them 25-30% of their revenue FOR THE YEAR, heads will roll and things will be FORCED to get done.

Just thinking, has Daruty ever had POSITIVE press? I think not...

Quote:

"The filing of the lawsuit opens up the possibility that Churchill will ask the District Court to issue a preliminary injunction that would temporarily block members of the Thoroughbred Horsemen's Group from withholding consent for the export of signals until the case can be heard."

:rolleyes:

They'll get the injunction. Mother****ers.

What's your opinon here Steve? I know the tracks have been pushing that they doubled the royalty to horsemen in the last year, but that stat could be meaningless based on what the numbers really are. From a PR standpoint, it's a brutal stand by the horsemen..Do they have a leg to stand on?

Don't have an opinion honestly as I don't know enough about the specific scenarios vis a vis tracks, platforms and horsemen to know who has the 'right of way'. That's why I yield to guys like Crist, Hegarty, Ted Mudge, Scott Daruty to explain the positions of each party involved. Everyone has responsibility and stakes in the system, and everyone needs to make a fair share. Ostensibly, no one can possibly be 100% right or wrong with their stance in this. Simply and naively, I think everyone needs to respect each other's vital role in the system and equitably divide the revenues.

Except, of course, the party that matters the most.

So Churchill will block the signal to their own outlet? That makes all the sense in the world.:rolleyes:

it is this thinking that has put the industry where it is.

Players are a PART, we don't matter any more then the horseman, track or horses

It is very simple, and I stated this before

Racetrack need horsemen and players to make money
Horseman need racetracks and players to make money
Players need horseman and racetracks to make money
Horses need horseman, racetracks and players to make money

How are we more important then anyone else?

Pretty classic isn't it. It isn't Churchill blocking the signal, the horseman are actually blocking the signal, they have to sign off on all simucast agreements

Because for the vast majority, horse racing is nothing but entertainment. There are other options. Of course the others are important, but not as important. Even if they all are somehow equal, the point is the same as my original post. The customer is always most important, even more so in a business that is slowly dying.

Here is where the issue. you have the industry as a heirarchy where I have it as a circle

Oops my bad. Thanks for the clarification. Doesn't make it any less crazy though.

Assume they are all equal, I have no problem with that. Do you see the bettor being given the slightest trace of respect in this whole ridiculous dispute? Please try to read the actual posts before responding.

I agree with Tom.. Are we missing something here?

I don't get where the players believe they have any say or right to be involved with this particular discussion. What do the players have to do with the internal workings of the providers of the product?

Do food shoppers think they have a 'right' to be involved in the negotiations between manufacturer and provisioner?

What do they have to add to the discussion anyhow?

I've read the post, you are saying that we don't have a say, and we SHOULDN'T. It is their BUSINESS.

And both Churchill and the THG have mentioned the bettor. If it were up to us, it would be easy because it isn't costing us anything to put on the show, or train a horse.

I have absolutely no problem with this stalemate, because indirectly, we actually have the largest voice out of all these people. While we need them as much as they need us, our dollar ultimately pays them.

As I said about 6 months ago, when these companies are down 10% or 15%, heads will roll and things will work out.